- Content Flow
Just playing with word, or trying to find something more generic than
"Page".
On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 9:41 PM, David Schneider <david.schneider_at_oracle.com
> wrote:
> **
>
> I don't know about the other people in the EG but I'm open to new names.
> Existing ADF users are familiar with the term "task flow" but I don't think
> we (the EG) should feel bound to that name. My hope is whatever we
> standardize will be based on the best of all the existing flow concepts,
> not just ADF, plus anything useful we find we need to add. Having a new
> name is probably a good way to indicate to users that what ends up in
> JavaEE maybe similar to something they've seen before but not 100%
> identical. I suspect having the JavaEE flow concept called something other
> than a "task flow" will make my ADF life easier down the road :-) .
>
> Some random thoughts:
>
> - Faces Flow
> - Enterprise Flow
> - Application Flow
> - Page Flow (although not all the nodes are pages)
>
> Dave
>
>
> On 03/13/2012 01:35 PM, Werner Keil wrote:
>
> So are suggestion welcome by the EG or has it become familiar at least
> with ADF users by now?
>
> Werner
>
> On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 8:15 PM, David Schneider <
> david.schneider_at_oracle.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> The term "task flow" is currently used in ADF. When we first started out
>> with ADF the concept was called a "process" but we needed to change it due
>> to confusion with BPEL processes. We switched to the term "task flow" but
>> I never thought that was all that great either, we just couldn't think of
>> anything better :-) . The same is true of the term "activity".
>>
>> Dave
>>
>>
>> On 03/13/2012 10:18 AM, Werner Keil wrote:
>>
>> I personally find the word "TaskFlow" a bit irritating, as the term is
>> mostly used by the Planning and ALM domain.
>>
>> Is it used already, I noticed, in the XML sample it was, or from
>> contributing systems like ADF, Spring, etc.?
>>
>> Action may be a little old fashioned or from a Swing and Struts era,
>> but even terms like "Activity" might sound a bit better.
>>
>> Just my impression, maybe I deal with Agile Coaching, PM and Task
>> Planning too much?[?]
>>
>> Other than the exact wording for particular elements I find it very
>> attractive. We applied a State Engine (thus the main term used there were
>> State and Transition) based Flow API under an Eclipse RCP environment some
>> while ago for a major telco. I still believe, something like it would suit
>> Eclipse well, but aside from the actual UI toolkit, there are aspects of it
>> I see useful here, too.
>>
>> Werner
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 4:53 PM, David Schneider <
>> david.schneider_at_oracle.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Here's an example of an ADF task flow (XML definition with descriptive
>>> comments attached):
>>>
>>> This flow is used to create/edit some type of data record (e.g. a
>>> customer contact, employee, etc.). The flow's starting point, its 'default
>>> activity', is indicated with the green halo. The router determines if an
>>> existing record key was passed to the flow as an input parameter and
>>> generates either outcome 'goto-create' or 'goto-edit'. The record is then
>>> displayed to the user for editing by the 'edit-record' view activity. Once
>>> the user is done editing the record the flow exits via the 'done' return
>>> activity.
>>>
>>> Dave
>>>
>>>
>>> On 03/13/2012 08:35 AM, David Schneider wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi Rossen,
>>>
>>> I'll create an example flow from ADF is send it out. Give me a day or
>>> so to get it pulled together.
>>>
>>> Dave
>>>
>>> On 03/12/2012 05:32 PM, Rossen Stoyanchev wrote:
>>>
>>> On 03/06/2012 08:27 PM, Edward Burns wrote:
>>>
>>> How do you define a flow as an object?
>>>
>>> Here are the three most obvious approaches.
>>>
>>> 1. additional syntax in the faces-config.
>>> 2. metadata in the Facelet pages that comprise the flow.
>>> 3. java code
>>>
>>> Perhaps there are specific cases that motivate including flow
>>> information in Facelet pages but I can't see what they are. It's worth
>>> mentioning them explicitly since putting flow information (navigation?) in
>>> Facelet pages seems contrary to the goal of Task Flow encapsulation.
>>>
>>> Would it be too early to create a small illustration of what a Task Flow
>>> might look like? Perhaps as simple as 2-3 flow nodes including a view, a
>>> method call, navigation, some conditional routing. I don't know what others
>>> think but it would help me get a better idea.
>>>
>>> Rossen
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>